Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
SUPREME COURT
Manila
THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. L-35316 October 26, 1987
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,
vs.
HONORABLE PEDRO JL. BAUTISTA and IMELDA MANGABAT
SORENSEN, respondents,
FERNAN, J.:
This is a petition for review on certiorari to annul the judgment of the then Court of
First Instance of Rizal, Branch III, Pasay City in Special Proceedings No. 2191-P the
dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, the Court hereby grants the herein petition, and the Local Civil
Registrar of Pasay City ordered, upon payment of the prescribed fees, to change
the word "American" into "Danish", the nationality of Bo Huage Sorensen appearing
in the birth certificate of his second son, Raymund Mangabat Sorensen [Exh. E-1]
for all purposes and effects. 1
In her verified petition filed before the lower court, private respondent Imelda
Mangabat Sorensen sought to correct and change the word "American" into the
word "Danish" in the birth certificate of her minor son, Raymund Mangabat
Sorensen to reflect the true nationality of Bo Huage Sorensen, her husband and the
father of said minor child.
Upon compliance with the jurisdictional requirements set forth in Rule 108 of the
Rules of Court on cancellation or correction of entries in the Civil Registry, the
petition was set for hearing.
The evidence adduced in support of the petition is summarized in the lower court's
decision as follows:
Petitioner Imelda Mangabat Sorensen in substance testified that she is married to
Bo Huage Sorensen, a Danish citizen [Exhs. "C" and "C-1"] that which her Danish
husband, she begot two (2) children, namely: Launny and Raymund [Exhs. "D" and
"E"]; that the nationality of her husband was correctly stated as "Danish" [Exhs. "D"
and "D-1"] while in the birth certificate of her second son Raymund, her husband's
nationality was erroneously stated as "American" [Exhs. "E" and "E-1"].
Bo Huage Sorensen testified that he was born of a Danish father, on April 22, 1944,
at Vejle Denmark, and presented a certification issued by the Royal Danish
Consulate of Manila [Exhs. "E", "F-1"and "F-2"]; that on March 14, 1968, he was
married to petitioner Imelda Mangabat at Makati, Rizal [Exhs. "C" and "C-1"] that he
is still considered tourist and living with his wife and two sons at 122-A Mabuhay St.,
Palay City; that in the birth certificate of his first child, Launny Mangabat Sorensen,
his nationality as "Danish" was correctly stated, while in the birth certificate of his
second son, Raymund, his citizenship was erroneously entered as "American"
[Exhs. "D" and "E"]. 2
The Republic of the Philippines opposed the aforesaid petition and moved for the
dismissal on the ground that a correction of entry in the Civil Registry is allowed only
when the same refers to mere clerical errors or mistakes, but not to substantial
changes affecting the civil status, nationality or citizenship of the person concerned.
Thereafter, the court a quo opposed rendered the assailed decision ordering the
Local Civil Registrar of Pasay City as prayed for to make the necessary corrections
in the entry of birth of minor Raymund Mangabat Sorensen.
Upon denial of its motion for reconsideration, oppositor Republic of the Philippines
appealed to this Court, raising the sole issue of whether or not the challenged
decision which involves the question of citizenship is a matter which can legally be
treated under the provision of Article 412 of the Civil Code, in conjunction with Rule
108 of the Rules of Court. 3
The petitioner Republic of the Philippines claims that the proceedings laid down in
Article 412 of the Civil Code, in relation to Rule 108 of the Rules of Court, refer only
entitled to oppose the petition: - ill the civil registrar, and [2] any person having or
claiming any interest under the entry whose cancellation or correction is sought.
the ground that the correction being sought did riot refer to a mere clerical mistake
but to a substantial change involving the nationality of a person.
If all these procedural requirements have been followed, a petition for correction
and/or cancellation of entries in the record of birth even if filed and conducted under
Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court can no longer be described as "summary".
There can be no doubt that when an opposition to the petition is filed either by the
Civil Registrar or any person having or claiming any interest in the entries sought to
be caancelled and/or corrected and the opposition is actively prosecuted, the
proceedings thereon become adversary proceedings. 11
In the light of the foregoing which show compliance with Sections 2, 4 and 5 of Rule
108, the proceedings undertaken in the lower court in Special Proceedings No.
2191-P were unmistakably adversary, thus removing the initial apprehension of the
State that "if the entries in the civil registrar could corrected ... through a mere
summary proceeding and not through an appropriate action wherein all the parties
who may be affected by the entries are notified or represented, we would set wide
open the door to fraud or other mischief, the consequence of which might be
detrimental and far-reaching." 12
In the present case, the records show that the Pasay City Local Civil Registrar and
the Solicitor General [as counsel for the Republic] were made parties to the petition
for correction of entry in the civil registry filed in the Court of First Instance of Rizal,
Pasay City branch. The proper notice was published once a week for three [3]
consecutive weeks in the Rizal Weekly Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation.
The Republic appeared through a trial attorney of the Office of the Solicitor General
who was present and did not object to the presentation of evidence, although after
the hearing, the said trial attorney filed an opposition and/or motion to dismiss on
WHEREFORE, the instant petition for review on certiorari is hereby denied for lack
of merit and the decision of the court a quo in Special Proceedings No. 2191-P is
affirmed.
SO ORDERED.